Which ones of Axl's indescretions do you find it diificult to forgive him for?

[EvH]

Why are you comparing Bieber and the Crüe?

[Apollo]

Afford Axl to live like a king? Excuse me mr. communist, but that's how it works. A concert is also a job, requires money. Internet made music free which is a shame, because young people don't give the same value to music people from the old days give. To go to a store, buy an album, go home, open it, smell it, read every corner of the booklet, listen each and every song one by one. Now people just download 100 songs per day, barely listen to 50 WHILE they're doing other things. Yes Axl do deserve the money from concerts and from the record sales, it's the least we can do for him for everything he gave us through the years.

The Bieber/Crue comment is just to show that maybe some people here should go somehwre else. I don't dig any Slash material since he's first Snakepit album. Therefore Im not into a Slash related forum complaining and bitching like a fuckin' pussy, I just erased the asshole from my life. If any of you ain't happy with the current line up or whatever from the present, get the fuck out and go jerk off using the past but leave the ones who are happy about the present alone.

And I was being ironic (maybe not?!) about real fans to owe Axl an apology. Go search at the dictionary - I R O N Y.

Wow.

I'm gonna bow out of this discussion as you obviously have some serious issues.

Good luck to you though.

[magisme]

Afford Axl to live like a king? Excuse me mr. communist, but that's how it works. A concert is also a job, requires money. Internet made music free which is a shame, because young people don't give the same value to music people from the old days give. To go to a store, buy an album, go home, open it, smell it, read every corner of the booklet, listen each and every song one by one. Now people just download 100 songs per day, barely listen to 50 WHILE they're doing other things. Yes Axl do deserve the money from concerts and from the record sales, it's the least we can do for him for everything he gave us through the years.

The Bieber/Crue comment is just to show that maybe some people here should go somehwre else. I don't dig any Slash material since he's first Snakepit album. Therefore Im not into a Slash related forum complaining and bitching like a fuckin' pussy, I just erased the asshole from my life. If any of you ain't happy with the current line up or whatever from the present, get the fuck out and go jerk off using the past but leave the ones who are happy about the present alone.

And I was being ironic (maybe not?!) about real fans to owe Axl an apology. Go search at the dictionary - I R O N Y.

You guys are fuckin' hysterical.

[TeeJay410]

For reference, often a settlement is made if the party being accused is guilty of the transgressions and wants it to go away or they don't want to go through the process guilty or not and want it to go away. In a settlement the accused party is not required to admit guilt or otherwise.

Other times a settlement is offered by the accusing party to make it go away in converse situations where they don't have a case but want to get something out of it or they don't want to suffer through the process.

An example would be the NFL being sued by former players for having knowledge of concussions for decades and not acting to prevent them, worse yet denying the issue existed. The NFL settled with the players and in doing so they legally don't have to admit to any wrongdoing.

In the context of a celebrity being accused of beating two different celebrity figures, the settlement certainly points to Axl being guilty and wanting it to go away.

[axlsalinger]

Regarding the name thing, despite being on Team Axl for a long time, I do think he was a "control freak" with a lot of emotional issues in the early 90's, and this played a huge part in the breakup. However, I really don't blame him overall because there is enough evidence to suggest it was a group effort. People grow apart - it's sad, but it happens. When you look around at the music landscape to see which bands broke up with acrimony, and which ones have members who dislike each other publicly, the answer is most of 'em. I believe that Slash was not willing to compromise musically, anywhere near as much as he implies in interviews, and this put a real wedge into the inner workings of the band. He was dead wrong on this issue, and it was a major factor in the breakup.

So to answer the actual question, I was very upset with Axl for the Hall of Fame letter. It was misguided, cynical, and stupid. And it still bothers me. The other thing is the fact that he wasted his prime years. Half of it in doing nothing, and half of in doing things that he won't release. It's his life, but as every day goes by, the possibility of making something meaningful out of Guns n' Roses, and the impact it would have, diminishes further. There are and have always been only two choices: move forward in a meaningful way, or reunite. Pick a side and just fucking do it.

[wasted]

Didnt Izzy kick Vince Neils wife in the pussy?

Thats what Without You lyrics are about.

[spgunner]

Regarding the name thing, despite being on Team Axl for a long time, I do think he was a "control freak" with a lot of emotional issues in the early 90's, and this played a huge part in the breakup. However, I really don't blame him overall because there is enough evidence to suggest it was a group effort. People grow apart - it's sad, but it happens. When you look around at the music landscape to see which bands broke up with acrimony, and which ones have members who dislike each other publicly, the answer is most of 'em. I believe that Slash was not willing to compromise musically, anywhere near as much as he implies in interviews, and this put a real wedge into the inner workings of the band. He was dead wrong on this issue, and it was a major factor in the breakup.

So to answer the actual question, I was very upset with Axl for the Hall of Fame letter. It was misguided, cynical, and stupid. And it still bothers me. The other thing is the fact that he wasted his prime years. Half of it in doing nothing, and half of in doing things that he won't release. It's his life, but as every day goes by, the possibility of making something meaningful out of Guns n' Roses, and the impact it would have, diminishes further. There are and have always been only two choices: move forward in a meaningful way, or reunite. Pick a side and just fucking do it.

I loved Axl's letter to the RNRHOF. Makes me feel proud of being a GN'R fan. One of the few bands out there that is 100% to what they believe. And there's a punk attitude to it that it's in GN'Rs soul since the beginning.

As fars as Axl losing his prime years, etc... you're judging someone else's life. People usually watch the amazing '93 gigs and believe that band could have done much more at the next years of the 90's if they were still together but for the little we know of all the shit Axl was dealing with inside his personal life (not mentioning Guns here), it could be a disaster and a horrible thing to watch. And each one of us has its own timetable. For me, the best GN'R record is CD and I'm loving the gigs since 2009 (even though I love Bucket - and I'm a Guns fan since '89, been in 2 gigs in 1992), so who knows where and when are you gonna have your "prime years"? Or "more prime years"? I see Axl screaming his lungs off on Shackler's in Japan '09 in much better shape than EVER. I think some people judge based on what didn't happen in a way they ignore the present and in a way they don't expect better things for the future. This is strange.

But I know something: after all these years, I believe in Axl. I believe in this band.

[jbhutto]

"I can forgive him for taking a while to release music."

A while? lol.

I dunno, I just find it frustrating that a guy like Axl couldn't find a way to at least release more material than he did and couldn't have had a potentially more low key career afterwards as a solo artist. I'm a big fan of the Pixies, and even though that band broke up (around the same time actually), Frank Black / Black Francis (the frontman) went on to release tons of solo material and other stuff. With a prolificness that sort of makes him seem like the anti-Axl. Ie, steady releases every 1-2 years. This continued even when the Pixies re-united in the early 2000s or whenever it was (though there was no new Pixies material). And more recently Kim Deal (the bass player) quit and while some fans/media were outraged ("No Kim, No Deal" etc), the band have still gone ahead and released 2 EPs of new material. They've been met with mixed reviews but as a fan I'm just glad the band is still doing something.

As a GnR fan I can understand Axl's perfectionist ways and wanting to release a big, bombastic album, but looking at the trajectory of CD we should've at least gotten 3 albums in that same timeframe (well, 4 by now). Instead of 1, then nothing for 6 years on top of endless touring. I wouldn't necessarily say I'm disappointed though, I mean I'm thankful for the music that Axl/GnR did make but all of questions of what could have been / what their possibly is (in the vaults gathering cobwebs) makes it frustrating.

Edited January 9, 2014 by jbhutto

[Mr. Dude]

"I can forgive him for taking a while to release music."

A while? lol.

I dunno, I just find it frustrating that a guy like Axl couldn't find a way to at least release more material than he did and couldn't have a potentially more low key career afterwards as a solo artist. I'm a big fan of the Pixies, and even though that band broke up (around the same time actually), Frank Black / Black Francis (the frontman) went on to release tons of solo material and other stuff. With a prolificness that sort of makes him seem like the anti-Axl. Ie, steady releases every 1-2 years. This continued even when the Pixies re-united in the early 2000s or whenever it was (even though there was no new Pixies material). And more recently Kim Deal (the bass player) quit and even though some fans/media were outraged ("No Kim, No Deal" etc) the band have still gone ahead and released 2 EPs of new material. They've been met with mixed reviews but as a fan I'm just glad the band is still doing something.

I love Frank Black too and I enjoy a lot of his solo stuff almost as much as the Pixies stuff, but they are really just opposite ends of the artistic spectrum. Not too mention, that the Pixies were never as big as Guns. Even in their prime, they were still more of an indie band. They became much more popular after the breakup than they ever were when they were together. As opposite as Axl's approach is to guys like Frank Black or even Neil Young, I can see some similarities there- primarily that they do things on their own terms without regard to media, popular opinion, fan pressure, etc. Frank and Neil are far more organic artists whereas Axl is a perfectionist, but I think in all their cases, its the art that comes first and the business side a distant 2nd. I'm not saying that money isn't a concern or a motivator, but they won't compromise their artistic terms/integrity purely for the sake of money. Of course, thats just my opinion, but I do see the common denominator between them as- doing it their way , regardless of consequence.

[spgunner]

Id rather have 1 fuckin' perfect album in a decade than 3 "ok" albums. Boston took 11 years to release a new album. Many bands and artists take different amounts of time to release their stuff. If it takes 10 more years to have a follow up to CD at the same level or even on a higher level (which is what happens since the first record in my opinion), I'll be here when it's time ! Of course some of you would want Axl to play by the record company's book and be like many bandass out there, industry puppets - record, tour, record, tour, record, tour. No quality at all. I just hope Axl and the band and management can solve their issues (whatever it is and seems like it's ugly) with the record company so they can have some piece of mind.

[Apollo]

Id rather have 1 fuckin' perfect album in a decade than 3 "ok" albums.

Of course some of you would want Axl to play by the record company's book and be like many bandass out there, industry puppets - record, tour, record, tour, record, tour. No quality at all.

LOL.

I guess I have more faith in Axl's abilities than you do. I think the man is way more talented than you do, and that he could put out amazing albums every 4-5 years. He did it before with Appetite, Lies and the Illusions. That was 3.5 albums worth of material in five years. I have extreme faith in his talent and think he could do that again, no problem. Weird that you think if Axl put out an album every five years they would just be "OK." I wish you had more respect for his talent and songwriting abilities.

Your second comment about being industry puppets is pretty funny as well. Is that what GnR was in the late 80s and early 90s? When they released 3.5 albums in five years, and broke records with the amount of touring they did to support them? They were also all over the media. Music videos for every single, Axl did interviews with every magazine, they did MTV interviews, they played awards shows and late night talk shows.........they did ALL the things you are now describing as being bad things. According to you, they were just industry puppets.

Your logic is very confusing.

So you like it that your favorite band doesn't regularly put out music and would prefer one album every 15 years over an album every 5 years.

You think Axl Rose is God, but you don't think he can create quality music in five year chunks

And you don't like bands that are fan-friendly - release albums, do interviews, music videos and do a lot of touring......you prefer bands that don't put out albums, don't talk to the media and don't tour a lot.

Only on a GnR forum would fans say it was a good thing that Axl didn't release more music. Weirdest logic I've ever heard.

Wow.

There is a first for everything, I suppose.

Though I can't ever imagine hearing a die-hard fan of a band saying "Man, I hate that my favorite band releases new music every few years. And I sure wish they'd stop touring, do we really need to go see them live every few years? And damn the lead singer for doing two interviews last year, none of us fans want to know what's going on in his life and what the band's future plans are. And gosh darn it, why did the band have to play an acoustic set on the Kimmel show last night? Sigh - it sucks to be a fan of this band. I wish they'd just disappear for the next 10 years. No albums, no touring, no interviews. That would be so much better than being a product fan-friendly band."

[November_rain]

Nov_Rain..........really? You obviously have a problem with this topic, you've stated that a couple times. I said "your anger should be towards the person who started the topic".....and from that simple sentence, you took that I was saying you have anger issues??? I don't even know how to respond to something like that. The only thing I can say is maybe go back and re-read what I posted.

First: I don´t have any problem with this topic. All I did was state an opinion as the rest of forum users did and last I checked, having an opinion about something does not mean I have a problem with the matters discussed.

Second: You said "my anger should be towards the person who started the topic" so yes, with that simple sentence you are implying I have anger issues and let me remind you that you have accused me of having anger issues before

[volcano62]

Id rather have 1 fuckin' perfect album in a decade than 3 "ok" albums.

Of course some of you would want Axl to play by the record company's book and be like many bandass out there, industry puppets - record, tour, record, tour, record, tour. No quality at all.

LOL.

I guess I have more faith in Axl's abilities than you do. I think the man is way more talented than you do, and that he could put out amazing albums every 4-5 years. He did it before with Appetite, Lies and the Illusions. That was 3.5 albums worth of material in five years. I have extreme faith in his talent and think he could do that again, no problem. Weird that you think if Axl put out an album every five years they would just be "OK." I wish you had more respect for his talent and songwriting abilities.

Your second comment about being industry puppets is pretty funny as well. Is that what GnR was in the late 80s and early 90s? When they released 3.5 albums in five years, and broke records with the amount of touring they did to support them? They were also all over the media. Music videos for every single, Axl did interviews with every magazine, they did MTV interviews, they played awards shows and late night talk shows.........they did ALL the things you are now describing as being bad things. According to you, they were just industry puppets.

Your logic is very confusing.

So you like it that your favorite band doesn't regularly put out music and would prefer one album every 15 years over an album every 5 years.

You think Axl Rose is God, but you don't think he can create quality music in five year chunks

And you don't like bands that are fan-friendly - release albums, do interviews, music videos and do a lot of touring......you prefer bands that don't put out albums, don't talk to the media and don't tour a lot.

Only on a GnR forum would fans say it was a good thing that Axl didn't release more music. Weirdest logic I've ever heard.

Wow.

There is a first for everything, I suppose.

Though I can't ever imagine hearing a die-hard fan of a band saying "Man, I hate that my favorite band releases new music every few years. And I sure wish they'd stop touring, do we really need to go see them live every few years? And damn the lead singer for doing two interviews last year, none of us fans want to know what's going on in his life and what the band's future plans are. And gosh darn it, why did the band have to play an acoustic set on the Kimmel show last night? Sigh - it sucks to be a fan of this band. I wish they'd just disappear for the next 10 years. No albums, no touring, no interviews. That would be so much better than being a product fan-friendly band."

Why are you attacking and ridiculing his opinion?

[Apollo]

Id rather have 1 fuckin' perfect album in a decade than 3 "ok" albums.

Of course some of you would want Axl to play by the record company's book and be like many bandass out there, industry puppets - record, tour, record, tour, record, tour. No quality at all.

LOL.

I guess I have more faith in Axl's abilities than you do. I think the man is way more talented than you do, and that he could put out amazing albums every 4-5 years. He did it before with Appetite, Lies and the Illusions. That was 3.5 albums worth of material in five years. I have extreme faith in his talent and think he could do that again, no problem. Weird that you think if Axl put out an album every five years they would just be "OK." I wish you had more respect for his talent and songwriting abilities.

Your second comment about being industry puppets is pretty funny as well. Is that what GnR was in the late 80s and early 90s? When they released 3.5 albums in five years, and broke records with the amount of touring they did to support them? They were also all over the media. Music videos for every single, Axl did interviews with every magazine, they did MTV interviews, they played awards shows and late night talk shows.........they did ALL the things you are now describing as being bad things. According to you, they were just industry puppets.

Your logic is very confusing.

So you like it that your favorite band doesn't regularly put out music and would prefer one album every 15 years over an album every 5 years.

You think Axl Rose is God, but you don't think he can create quality music in five year chunks

And you don't like bands that are fan-friendly - release albums, do interviews, music videos and do a lot of touring......you prefer bands that don't put out albums, don't talk to the media and don't tour a lot.

Only on a GnR forum would fans say it was a good thing that Axl didn't release more music. Weirdest logic I've ever heard.

Wow.

There is a first for everything, I suppose.

Though I can't ever imagine hearing a die-hard fan of a band saying "Man, I hate that my favorite band releases new music every few years. And I sure wish they'd stop touring, do we really need to go see them live every few years? And damn the lead singer for doing two interviews last year, none of us fans want to know what's going on in his life and what the band's future plans are. And gosh darn it, why did the band have to play an acoustic set on the Kimmel show last night? Sigh - it sucks to be a fan of this band. I wish they'd just disappear for the next 10 years. No albums, no touring, no interviews. That would be so much better than being a product fan-friendly band."

Why are you attacking and ridiculing his opinion?

Oh Volcano.

Where am I "attacking and ridiculing" his opinion?

This guy has been way more aggressive and insulting towards me than I have towards him - but you completely ignore that because of some grudge you can't get past. Let it go man. Let it go.

This guy made some pretty big statements and I'm just asking for more clarification. If you think that me, basically REPEATING what he said - is "ridiculing" him.....then that represents your real thoughts on what he said, rather than what I said.

But like I've asked you to do a million times. Rather than commenting on ME - a POSTER - how about addressing the actual topic? How about giving your opinion of where I am actually wrong?

***********

Nov_Rain.

So you are offended that I used the word "anger" in one sentence. If anger isn't the appropriate word, then I sincerely APOLOGIZE for using that word.

And with all due respect, you are wrong about your implication about the use of the word anger meaning somebody has anger problems.

I've been angry before - doesn't mean I have anger problems.

I've been sad before - doesn't mean I go through life sad all the time.

I've been depressed before - doesn't mean I have depression issues.

I'm sure you are a great person in real life who has no anger issues at all. None of us can judge what anybody is like in real life (except maybe Warchild and a couple others), so I apologize for insulting you in this way.

Edited January 9, 2014 by Groghan

[spgunner]

Id rather have 1 fuckin' perfect album in a decade than 3 "ok" albums.

Of course some of you would want Axl to play by the record company's book and be like many bandass out there, industry puppets - record, tour, record, tour, record, tour. No quality at all.

LOL.

I guess I have more faith in Axl's abilities than you do. I think the man is way more talented than you do, and that he could put out amazing albums every 4-5 years. He did it before with Appetite, Lies and the Illusions. That was 3.5 albums worth of material in five years. I have extreme faith in his talent and think he could do that again, no problem. Weird that you think if Axl put out an album every five years they would just be "OK." I wish you had more respect for his talent and songwriting abilities.

Your second comment about being industry puppets is pretty funny as well. Is that what GnR was in the late 80s and early 90s? When they released 3.5 albums in five years, and broke records with the amount of touring they did to support them? They were also all over the media. Music videos for every single, Axl did interviews with every magazine, they did MTV interviews, they played awards shows and late night talk shows.........they did ALL the things you are now describing as being bad things. According to you, they were just industry puppets.

Your logic is very confusing.

So you like it that your favorite band doesn't regularly put out music and would prefer one album every 15 years over an album every 5 years.

You think Axl Rose is God, but you don't think he can create quality music in five year chunks

And you don't like bands that are fan-friendly - release albums, do interviews, music videos and do a lot of touring......you prefer bands that don't put out albums, don't talk to the media and don't tour a lot.

Only on a GnR forum would fans say it was a good thing that Axl didn't release more music. Weirdest logic I've ever heard.

Wow.

There is a first for everything, I suppose.

Though I can't ever imagine hearing a die-hard fan of a band saying "Man, I hate that my favorite band releases new music every few years. And I sure wish they'd stop touring, do we really need to go see them live every few years? And damn the lead singer for doing two interviews last year, none of us fans want to know what's going on in his life and what the band's future plans are. And gosh darn it, why did the band have to play an acoustic set on the Kimmel show last night? Sigh - it sucks to be a fan of this band. I wish they'd just disappear for the next 10 years. No albums, no touring, no interviews. That would be so much better than being a product fan-friendly band."

I'm still considering if I should lose precious time to answer to this. Maybe you should read what I wrote again before that. Anyway, some quick ones here: 1) No, Axl ain't no God, he's a human being. 2) Yes Id rather have 1 album per year. BUT I'm very ok about getting a new album doesn't matter how long it takes because I'm not a spoiled kid demanding shit from people we barely or not even know in person. remember that there are no rules to release music. Each band does whatever they want, for their specific reasons and each band out there have their own share of issues and others. 3) Every band back then (80s, 90s) would do it, that's how things worked to survive, to make it. Anyway do you really think they always played by the book? If you think so, you have no idea what GN'R is all about because this band was always kinda out of the regular shit out there. 4) GN'R is probably more fan friendly than most "fan friendly" bands out there. The way Axl talks and treats fans (not to mention the rest of the band, etc) is amazing. Since 2009, we have had lots of touring, an official website, 2 Axl interviews on TV, many Axl interviews over the internet (and the chats with fans), the band has been all over the place in all kinds of media, the record everybody demanded for so long is out there for only 5 years (many "fan friendly" bands take more than 5 years to release a new album but I don't know why some people feel so good crucyfying Axl for the long time of CD), etc. Just because there are no videos or a proper marketing for CD or because there's no new album in 5 years GN'R ain't fan friendly? This is ridiculous. But you know what I DON"T GET? Why do frustrated unhappy people keep on following the band. I already said this before and I will say it again. Last time I enjoyed something Slash did was when he was still in Guns. After that, I didn't enjoy his shit. SO I LEFT. I'm not a fan of Slash, I don't go to his forums to bitch and moan and cry. It's a waste of time to be complaining here. The fan base all over the internet is sooooo negative these days. It's sick and it sucks. It wasn't like this back at the gnronline Live Era official forum or at the first years of other forums out there. Sad.

[November_rain]

***********

Nov_Rain.

So you are offended that I used the word "anger" in one sentence. If anger isn't the appropriate word, then I sincerely APOLOGIZE for using that word.

And with all due respect, you are wrong about your implication about the use of the word anger meaning somebody has anger problems.

I've been angry before - doesn't mean I have anger problems.

I've been sad before - doesn't mean I go through life sad all the time.

I've been depressed before - doesn't mean I have depression issues.

I'm sure you are a great person in real life who has no anger issues at all. None of us can judge what anybody is like in real life (except maybe Warchild and a couple others), so I apologize for insulting you in this way.

I didn´t feel offended, I just don´t like it when people assume wrong stuff about me, that´s all.

Mods sorry for the off topic.